nbcwashington.com’s report on yesterday’s Starbucks Appreciation Day is fair and balanced. Except “fair” means (as always) including a quote from the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence and “balance” means giving equal voice to a minority opinion (gun grabbing)—albeit one that makes the media happy. Check out the headline above this “why can’t we all just get along” news package: “Anti-Gun Group Boycotting Starbucks.” What does that tell you?
Glad to see they found the OC’er with the best sense in fashion and accessories. The Kimber looked pretty nice though.
I’m not convinced that was really editorial slant. I mean, a disregard for fashion is almost a prerequisite for OC.
Any OC’er who is carrying to make a point ought to wear a collar and tie, IMO (but no jacket, obviously).
Good point.
Your concise characterization of the “fair and balanced” propaganda technique is spot on. The most insidious version of “the unattributed survey” is executed simply making the claim that “a lot of people are saying” or “most people think”. Unattributed “studies have shown” is also pretty bad. All appeals to (an imaginary) authority fallacy. Unfortunately the catalog of logical fallacies is very eagerly re-purposed as a catalog of persuasive techniques by media, particularly cable media.
-D
I expect the two dollar bills will outweigh the petition. The rest of the claims by the anti’s are crap.
They probably outweighed the petition in the first hour of business. And for a corporation, it’s a much bigger thing to show them money than to show them signatures on a piece of paper.
Starbucks received far more support from the 2A community than from the antis, and that’s all the bean counters care about, not the tantrums of grown-up children nor the slanted excuse for journalism from NBC and the like.
“Bean counters”? At Starbucks? Good one.
“Did you notice anybody armed?”
“No I did not.”
“Now that you know some are carrying guns, what’s your reaction?”
“It makes me feel a little uncomfortable…not necessarily safe.”
That’s a perfectly reasonable reaction. I wouldn’t feel safe either if I were obliviously going about my day not noticing the people around me. Not because they are armed, but because I’m walking around unaware of my own immediate surroundings.
Condition White all the way. This is the most profound level of disarmament, disarming the mind and not even allowing for the possibility that bad things might happen and that maybe not everyone in your immediate vicinity has good intentions. It wouldn’t matter a person in this mental state was armed to the teeth, because he or she would never actually react in time to do anything useful.
Who listens or watches NBC anymore?
+1
+1
Oh yeah.. Most americans in this country agree that guns shouldn’t be allowed in stores… OK whatever you say. They made that line up. What world do they live in? I feel like they dont even speak english sometimes.
There is a fifth dimension, beyond that which is known to man. It is a dimension as vast as space and as timeless as infinity. It is the middle ground between light and shadow, between science and superstition, and it lies between the pit of man’s fears and the summit of his knowledge. This is the dimension of imagination. It is an area which we call The Twilight Zone. A.k.a Upper-class Washington, D.C.
…or the Outer Limits, of sanity.
Noticeably absent from the story:
“Out of hundreds, maybe thousands of law-abiding gun owners carrying their firearms today, not a single one of them accidentally shot anyone nor did any of them go on a murderous rampage.”
Good point. It would have been nice to at least get a “no incidents were reported” in there.
Sure, the “most people agree” bit by the Brady’s is clearly utter nonsense and has no meaningful data to back it up. That said, the fact that the piece showed lawful citizens exercising their right in a peaceful, lawful manner, without any drama, says to me that we are looking at a sea change in how rights advocates are viewed by the public at large. We are winning.
There was a middle aged woman behind me in line at the SB this morning. I paid for my purchase with $2’s, ask the cashier if she’d seen others doing the same (a couple but not many, this is Cambridge MA after all), and I explained to the cashier what was going on; boycott vs. buycott. The woman behind me then asked me a few questions. I gave her the overview and it seemed to me that I had just given her a situation that she had never considered before. It was all very polite, matter of fact and cordial. Sewing seeds one citizen at a time.
Please keep spreading the Jeffersons y’all.
Here’s what I’m going to be doing for the next year. It will be a little social/economic experiment. Every pay day, I’ll be going to my bank and taking out $50 – $100 in $2’s. I’ll be paying for my lunches, convenience store purchases and other sundries in $2’s. I’m hoping that will strike up a conversation that will allow me to present myself as a thoughtful, reasonable, non-threatening and well spoken citizen and express my position on the 2A. Evangelizing for the 2A in a gentle way. Let “them” see that we aren’t the monsters that many think we are.
Symbolism is a powerful tool. Let’s put it to good use. Grab a fist full of $2’s, make a difference.
I really like your idea and will try to do the same.
Thanks Joe. If the pro-2A movement were to truly co-opt the $2 as our symbol, we would have a very powerful, yet subtle, tool to promote the our core values and the history on which this great Republic was founded.
A friend/fellow shooter created a stamp “GUN OWNER’S MONEY” which he would emblazon all his change with before spending it. Image all $2’s saying that…
“Nobody was shot at a Starbuck today, details at 11”
Where’s Mike with his rant about how we purposely endangered Starbucks employees and customers?
“giving equal voice to a minority opinion (gun grabbing)”
Bull!
Think of it this way. 80M gun owners and 240M non-gun owners. What kind of cherry-picking of stats did you have to do to get a majority out of that?
Do you actually think ALL of the 80M are with you AND half of the 240? That’s what it would take.
Here’s a wacky idea: let’s look at actual data instead of just making assumptions: http://www.gallup.com/poll/150341/record-low-favor-handgun-ban.aspx
I didn’t know we were talking about such a limited and specific group as those who “favor gun bans.”
That’s what you need to do to have your “majority,” manipulate the wording of the question.
Generally speaking, I don’t think you can say “gun-rights folks are in the majority.”
Facts Mike. Where are they?
And now after being pressed for facts MikeB will do his disappearing act, having successfully committed yet another blog hit and run.
ITT two cherry pickers duel to the death with their gruesome hydraulic arms!
Unfortunately neither side can claim a “majority” of support because neither side uses a half logical method to calculate their support base, because no such method exists.
So something is weird with the link, and apparently the site thinks it’s an internal link. It’s too late to edit now, but you can copy and paste the URL and it will take you to the survey.
The survey actually asks four different questions, then does the breakdowns. Support for gun control is down to record low levels across the board and is trending downward. They also make their methodology and data available.
Finally, Mike, your reply makes it clear that you didn’t actually read the link. Normally I’d write that off as due to the fact that the link was weird, but I know you wouldn’t have under normal circumstances either.
I have plenty of friends who are NOT gun owners but support the second amendment. Your very statement ignores the FACT that there are people who don’t own firearms, but support the right of their fellow citizens to do so.
And aren’t you leaving out the opposite cases? Many gun owners side with us in matters of gun control.
That’s a pretty broad statement. What is your EXACT stance and what is your estimation of “gun owners?” By not framing a definition, the argument doesn’t really hold water one way or the other. How many gun owners do you personally know that want to deny justifiable self defense with a firearm? How many want total confiscation? How many want…You get the idea.
Facts Mike. Where are they? Your inability to provide any factual evidence for your “common sense” assertions and your unwillingness to engage debate on that level is why your time here is running short. There’s only so much hit and run that I will tolerate.
That’s because elitists tend to flock together.
“Many” is the strangest number I’ve ever seen. Is that supposed to be some messed up roman numeral?
I’m a gun owner who supports gun control. If you are in control of your gun, you’ll always hit your target!
80M legal gun owners but THE FAMILIES THEY DEFEND takes a huge bite out of the 240M non-owners. Additionally, children are completely dumped into the 240M non-owners since legally anyone under 18 cannot own a gun, so take away 74M from that. Then you have to figure that just cause someone doesn’t OWN a gun doesn’t mean they are OPPOSED to it. They might be too poor and live in a dungheap like NYC or Chicago where it’s prohibitively expensive or they simply don’t feel a need to own one for self-defense but have no issue with others carrying or owning them. So ya, when you trim those numbers out, liberals who want to take all guns, disarm the public, prevent them from having a viable means of self-defense ARE a minority. But keep on espousing your simplistic non-sense if it makes you feel better.
“I didn’t realize, but now that I know I retroactively felt unsafe”
LAWLZ
Guns scare me but roving packs of thugs don’t cause I don’t wanna be called a racist.